Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But your 1980s mentality is rendered outdated by the fact that hundreds of millions(if not billions) of people directly affected by the Bay Area on a daily basis.
What 1980s mentality? That this is a multipolar world, the US now shares the stage with various other countries, and that there is no primate city for the US since there are so many large metropolises but NYC is by far the largest of them (though its contributions are in turn dwarfed by the collective contribution of the rest of the US)? The Bay Area is smaller compared to the NYC by a large margin--if you don't see the margin as being small, then the Bay Area doesn't really get much right in scoffing at pretty much any other major metro in the US since the margin by which the Bay Area is going to be a lot smaller. And when the topic is SF versus NYC, SF is obviously a much smaller component of the Bay Area than NYC is of the tri-state area so this difference just gets compounded.
What 1980s mentality? That this is a multipolar world, the US now shares the stage with various other countries, and that there is no primate city for the US since there are so many large metropolises but NYC is by far the largest of them (though its contributions are in turn dwarfed by the collective contribution of the rest of the US)? The Bay Area is smaller compared to the NYC by a large margin--if you don't see the margin as being small, then the Bay Area doesn't really get much right in scoffing at pretty much any other major metro in the US since the margin by which the Bay Area is going to be a lot smaller. And when the topic is SF versus NYC, SF is obviously a much smaller component of the Bay Area than NYC is of the tri-state area so this difference just gets compounded.
I am assuming he is referencing Facebook, Google, and Apple
Hmm so is Seoul more important becuase more people use Samsung Phones than I Phones?
I think Apple is a better marketing company than technology company in many ways, but nothing wrong with that either
Though In all honesty the US Dept of Defense may be most influential in reality, maybe we should thank DC
Perhaps, but most of the world sees it differently and btw, the US now owns the industry of wireless technology specifically because of the Bay Area.
In any event, it is patently false to say that the level of clout and influence that the Bay Area has in the world in this day and age is 'miniscule' relative to anywhere, let alone New York.
There are too many people connected by what we do here on so many levels, and there is too much capital involved for that statement to even be remotely accurate.
Last edited by 18Montclair; 03-11-2013 at 02:24 PM..
Perhaps, but most of the world sees it differently and btw, the US now owns the industry of wireless technology specifically because of the Bay Area.
In any event, it is patently false to say that the level of clout and influence that the Bay Area has in the world in this day and age is 'miniscule' relative to anywhere, let alone New York.
There are too many people connected by what we do here on so many levels, and there is too much capital involved for that statement to even be remotely anymore.
"miniscule" to me is the wrong term absolutely
Though for a place I love in the Bay and esp SF, I think SF and the Bay do sometimes over glorify the importance of the place which is substantial. No need for a new PR campaign though so that is good
And they can thank Apple for the technology they stole to make their products.
Apple made touch screen phones the norm, the must have, the standard.
Samsung simply copied and pasted.
Eh, that's not quite right. They both stole from other people and they both have their stuff stolen and a lot of the patents they both own are such ridiculously niggling things done mostly to hedge themselves against lawsuits from others.
If watching technology trends tells me anything, it's that you should never think whoever the current leader in a sector will remain. To claim a company as why your area is important is silly.
Myspace
Nokia
IBM
Friendster
Sega
AOL
Blackberry
etc.
PS touch screen phones were out a year or more before iphone and quite popular over a year before the iphone came out. Apple is never bleeding edge technology, they just market very well to the mass consumer market and make things "pretty." Currently most of their products are certainly technologically behind their counterparts in specifications and capability. It has been that way since the early 90s. I had internet and email on my phone in 2001-2002 and you could get it free over gprs/wap, it was certainly nothing new, but yes it's pretty.
That isn't to say there aren't other tech companies in the Bay that do more innovative stuff. Google does way more interesting stuff than apple. If you want to talk innovation, talk Google, not Apple. You just sound silly to anybody who knows tech. They aren't innovators, they have always played it cautious on bringing in new features, never bleeding edge.
Last edited by grapico; 03-11-2013 at 05:46 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.